In the 1941 case of Pink v. A.A.A. Highway Express, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Superintendent Louis H. Pink, representing New York's insurance department as liquidator for an insolvent insurer (American Surety Company). The defendants were policyholders who had received dividends from American Surety while it was still solvent but which were later deemed fraudulent conveyances under New York law because they were paid out when the company was actually insolvent and should have been conserving assets to pay creditors. The court held that these payments could be recovered by the liquidator on behalf of all creditors despite a Georgia statute barring such recovery if made without actual intent to defraud specific creditors or hinder or delay them in pursuing their claims against debtor corporations' property within Georgia jurisdiction.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Pink v. A.A.A Highway Express, Inc., argued that the majority's decision undermined state sovereignty and violated principles of federalism. The dissenters contended that New York State had a legitimate interest in regulating its own insurance industry and protecting policyholders within its jurisdiction. They criticized the majority for allowing a foreign corporation to evade these regulations by declaring bankruptcy elsewhere, thereby stripping New York of its ability to protect local creditors. The dissent also expressed concern about potential abuse if corporations could simply choose their preferred bankruptcy venue without regard to where they conducted business or caused harm. In essence, they believed this ruling allowed companies too much freedom at the expense of states' rights and protections for local citizens.